:?: the explanation is really simple. he makes these caveats, yet argues how 'right' Ozzie is or how Ozzie is 'just stating the facts' or 'just telling it how it is' in other words, he tries for best of both worlds. condemning Ozzie for the things Ozzie says, while at the same time argreeing with every word that comes out of Ozzie's mouth, no matter how absurd. the irony is he says Ozzie is an idiot, but if recollection of this forum is correct, he agrees with just about everything Ozzie says, even while condemning him for it. Yeah, this is pretty absurd and farfetched.